3/32 chain on 1/8 fixed sprocket

actually said that the wrong way around, think it should be the teeth engaging the chain

No one is this dumb. The question has been answered 14 times already..

Do I get sponsorship for dropping the 14, 14?

Something's not engaging

Ever heard of chain stretch? This is what you need to do to yours.

Hang on... hang on...

Everyone wait a minute.

The Jack Russell is little, right? So, he's trying to climb up and give it to the labrador, yeah? But he cant cos he's too small and he keeps falling off?

What am I missing?

best thread ever.

what is this site?

what i want to know is if a 3/32 chain will engage the teeth of a 1/8 sprocket?

And the question was answered in the first response way up there ^^^ but I'll try and spell it out for you.

A 1/8" sprocket (it's a measurement, not just a fascinating number) is wider than the space between the inner plates on your 3/32" chain. So no, the two are not compatible (1/8 is 4/32, which is bigger than 3/32, see?).

If you had a 1/8" chain then it would fit on a 3/32" sprocket as the chain is wider than the sprocket teeth.

In both cases, the 'length' of the chain is the same, it, the rollers are the same distance apart along the chain length, but the width of the chain and the width of the sprocket is what's changing.

Either buy a new sprocket or a new chain.

"not just a fascinating number" lol. good work

I don't understand your confusion.

3/32 & 1/8 represent the width... 3/32 (thin) & 1/8 (less thin)

the small one won't fit onto the big one (much like the dog allegory) fundamental common sense.

;

It would be the reverse of chucking your salami in a bucket...

what, chucking your bucket into a salami?

And the question was answered in the first response way up there ^^^ but I'll try and spell it out for you.

A 1/8" sprocket (it's a measurement, not just a fascinating number) is wider than the space between the inner plates on your 3/32" chain. So no, the two are not compatible (1/8 is 4/32, which is bigger than 3/32, see?).

If you had a 1/8" chain then it would fit on a 3/32" sprocket as the chain is wider than the sprocket teeth.

In both cases, the 'length' of the chain is the same, it, the rollers are the same distance apart along the chain length, but the width of the chain and the width of the sprocket is what's changing.

Either buy a new sprocket or a new chain.

it's called pitch, not length.

Thanks for educating, gav

Try to imagine a twenty-knobed labrador trying to rape a giant anus. I don't remember the exact details but as you can imagine, it won't work.

Thanks for educating, gav

It's like 10,000 spoons when all you need is a knife.

I nominate this thread for thread of the day! (we should have a thread of the day award!)

Awesome thread, Gav is out buying a fur coat for sure.

it's called pitch, not length.

Yeah, I know that, but given that you couldn't understand why a 3/32 chain wouldn't fit on a 1/8 sprocket I wasn't about to confuse the situation with what could be perceived as jargon.

no Balki, the labrador is penetrating the narrower jack russell, just as the teeth of a 1/8 cog try to penetrate the spaces in the links of the narrower 3/32 chain. you must think more about this.

Just imagine a circular labrador with 14 - 19 cocks repeatedly penetrating a very long, articulated jack russell with hundreds of anuses.

That is, without doubt, the best analogy I have seen in a very long time.

what, chucking your bucket into a salami?

exactly my point

I nominate this thread for thread of the day! (we should have a thread of the day award!)

Does the poster get to kill themselves or do we get to kick their skulls in?

Fuck this place is clusterfucked now.

It's like 10,000 spoons when all you need is a knife.

Missed this one last night, LMAO, nice one mmccarthy.